The BIAW is the type of outfit that a wise candidate seeks to keep at arm’s length.

It has opposed environmental and climate change legislation. Without a scintilla of evidence, the BIAW has charged that mainstream green groups “silently approve” acts of arson by the Earth Liberation Front.

In an example of the outfit’s crudeness, the BIAW’s official newsletter declared that Gregoire was “a heartless, power-hungry she-wolf who would eat her own young to get ahead.”

How does that jibe with Dino Rossi’s efforts to attract women voters?

[…] How can Rossi promise transparency while playing footsy with an outfit that uses fronts to disguise the source of dollars behind nasty political ads?

How can his conservation credentials be reconciled with support from an organization that likens the environmental movement to Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party?

Which stands by the BIAW represent Rossi positions? What about its opposition to formation of a Puget Sound Partnership, its attempt to emasculate the Growth Management Act, or its opposition to protection for orcas? Or its denial that climate change is real?

One thing that seems clear is that there are really two Dino Rossi campaigns this year: the official campaign, that will attempt to present Rossi as a smiling, good-natured moderate, and the BIAW’s deceptive smear campaign that will attempt to tear down Gov. Gregoire on Rossi’s behalf, and by any means possible, even—as Joel points out about the current radio ads—shameless, facts-be-damned lying. (Funny how we don’t hear a peep from the amen editorialists at the Seattle Times, demanding Rossi pull these ads?)

On last night’s podcast (posted later today) I asked Joel if the BIAW’s deceptive charade was a violation of the spirit of our campaign finance laws, and he indicated that it was particularly egregious in light of Rossi’s emphasis on government transparency as a central theme of his campaign. While technically legal, the only thing transparent about the BIAW’s ChangePAC’s“independent” campaign is that it is a transparent lie.

And a well-funded lie it is. In fundraising letters the BIAW has promised contributors that defeating the “heartless, power-hungry she-wolf” Gov. Gregoire is their number one priority for 2008, and they always make a point of emphasizing that donors can legally contribute unlimited funds to their smear campaign. With millions of dollars of workers compensation rebates already flooding their coffers, and zero contribution and expenditure limits on their own political activities, we can expect the BIAW to conduct an unprecedented paid media campaign in both size and ferocity.

Having already spent $250,000 on radio ads by the first week in June, the BIAW’s anti-Gregoire campaign is surely budgeted in the millions. The lackluster slate at last week’s filing deadline suggests that the BIAW will largely stay out of judicial races this cycle, with the notable exception of BIAW “attorney” and (u)SP contributor Tim Ford’s overreaching bid for the State Court of Appeals. Sure, there will be a sprinkling of retro-rebate largess on AG Rob McKenna and a few other BIAW toadies, but their strategy seems clear: the BIAW is putting all its chips on the high-stakes governor’s race.

The BIAW (and their leadership) is an embarassment and any campaign that associates with this anti-environmental far right wing, nut case group is tainted. We need to get the word out on the BIAW and any candidate they support should have a negative stigma for associating with these far right loonies.

Hopefully, this will backfire and allow the regular people (average voters) to see through the far right agenda, the influence of money (and specific business interests) on the election and will bring down Rossi and McKenna. Puget sound voters don’t want unlimited growth that spoils the natural beauty of our area and opposes mass transit.

The best argument of the BIAW is that global warming will make Puget sound weather better….while destroying salmon runs, air and water quality and our health.

Ah, the BIAW candidate for Governor. From what I gather, the BIAW pushed very hard on my own trade association (Washington Association of Realtors) to get them to endorse Mr. Rossi.

A number of our more influential members are also BIAW members, but from the agents and brokers I’ve talked to, it looks like those folks are going to have to make up a significant reduction in contributions from the overall membership. Lots of us are, shall we say, “less than thrilled” with both the endorsement and the way it was handled.

Many angry phone calls, and I’ve noticed that my local association is keeping a rather low profile with regards to the endorsement. Knowing our county association leadership, I’m betting they’re about as happy with the endorsement as I am.

So, here’s the deal. First, as I know at least a few of my fellow agents have told me that they occasionally read this blog, I suggest that all of us delete the “voluntary RPAC contribution” portion of our dues, and send that money to Governor Gregoire’s campaign.

Next, we need to send a polite note to both the Washington Association of Realtors and the National Association of Realtors, telling them that our annual RPAC contribution will be going to the Gregoire campaign this year. Nothing says “pull your head out” like withholding money.

Finally, pass the word to your collegues. Certainly, some of them are actual Rossi supporters, and so are probably happy with the endorsement. Fine, that’s their choice.

But for the many that have noticed that our housing market is still one of the strongest in the country, and that our economy, while down, is still in the best shape of any of the states, we need to voice our support of the Governor that helped us get here.

With any luck, Ron Paul’s supporters in this state will get his name on the presidential ballot under the “G.O.P. Party”. That would simply require getting 1,000 signatures from registered voters in order for the “G.O.P. Party” to qualify as a third-party presidential candidacy.

That will make Dino Rossi look like a real dumb-ass to the Republican rank and file, and all of those moderate voters. Rather than running on the “Republican Party” ticket with John McCain, Rossi will be running on the “G.O.P. Party” ticket with Ron Paul.

I don’t want to hear another complaint from wingnuts about Unions contributing to election campaigns until they acknowledge that the BIAW use of worker’s compensation premiums, which is deducted from the employee paychecks, is worse.

After all, the BIAW agenda includes electing candidates who would REDUCE worker health protections, such as

Reduce or eliminate OSHA & State Labor & Industry inspections of the workplace;

Reduce or eliminate fines for employee negligence or rules violations which result in worker injuries;

Make it more difficult for injured workers to receive long-term compensation for injuries.

Of course, they don’t advertise their agenda as such – they just finance Republicans who want to go back to the 19th century employer-worker relationship, under the guise of “de-regulation”, or “reducing government waste” by de-funding the enforcement arms of the respective agencies.

In contrast, Union contributions support the overall goals of the Union membership: more secure jobs, better pay, organizing rights, etc. You might not agree with the specific candidates or legislation, but all Union members benefit collectively from that support, whether they agree with it or not.

But BIAW sure do like collecting those premiums from worker paychecks, even if they hate paying out claims! It’s bad enough having to deal with the State Industrial division of Labor & Industries when you are injured, but get a “private adjuster” from one of the “self-insured” outfits, and you will find that they (and their selected doctors) have never saw an injured worker that they didn’t think was either a fraud or someone who always imagines they are sick (can’t think of the word right now).

I don’t want to hear another complaint from wingnuts about Unions contributing to election campaigns until they acknowledge that the BIAW use of worker’s compensation premiums, which is deducted from the employee paychecks, is worse.

I am sure when the union thugs stop their deductions for political actions the BIAW will stop theirs.

Let me ask you rhp6033 have you ever missed a domestic connection flight because the pilot came on and said we need to wait for the ground people to “guide us in”? And it takes 15 or more minutes cuz they are busy. Well I have many times. Thank a union who said no to letting pilots autopark. Curiously I don’t miss connecting flights in Europe or Asia cuz the planes can come directly in and park.

Boy is BIAW gonna have egg on their stupid faces if it turns out the developer torched the houses himself for insurance money because he couldn’t sell them and tried to make it look like the work of eco-terrorists to avoid getting caught!!!

Give it up, you loser. We tried it your way 100 years ago. It didn’t work then, and it won’t work now, and even a Republican President (Theodore Roosevelt) recognized it 100 years ago.

Obama is going to win this state, and win it big. We need to be there for him, but also to concentrate on electing Gregoire, Ladenburg, and Goldmark, thereby taking out the BIAW slate — Rossi, McKenna, and Sutherland — and beating every one of them so badly that the BIAW is crippled and broken as a political force in Washington.

I’ll bet some of that money will come from that Texas developer who’s trying to export his homebuilder-protection laws to the rest of the country.

These laws take away the rights of buyers of defective homes to sue, forcing them into a builder-run arbitration system that, needless to say, sides with the builder 100% of the time.

It’s so bad that anyone who buys a new home in Texas is assuming major financial risks. If the home is uninhabitable, the buyer has to either wait for the builder to fix the defects in his own sweet time — which can take months or even years — or hire a contractor to make repairs at his own expense.

To find out more, google the phrase “Mother Jones Home Sour Home” for an article in Mother Jones Magazine about the Texas homebuilding industry’s relentless assault against consumers.

Ron Reagan busted the air controllers “union” years ago – so what union are you talking about?

The air controllers are the only one’s who have control over when a flight can come in. Any other straw men you want to set up?

Wages are down in this country because the unions have been eviscerated by Bush and Reagan. Europe is doing much better than us economically and they have stronger unions and national haelth care – explain that one.

It is easy and very simplistic to blame unions when you have no evidence – but if your job was on the line you would want a union behind you.

@11 “We need to … concentrate on electing Gregoire, Ladenburg, and Goldmark, thereby taking out the BIAW slate — Rossi, McKenna, and Sutherland — and beating every one of them so badly that the BIAW is crippled and broken as a political force in Washington.”

Hell, just take away their taxpayer subsidy. They’ve been using L & I taxes to fund their smear campaigns long enough. Just change the fucking law that lets them use money intended for injured workers to pay for political propaganda.

I am sure when the union thugs stop their deductions for political actions the BIAW will stop theirs.

A couple of small differences. First, it is possible for an individual to opt out of union political activity. It is not possible for an individual to opt out of BIAW political activity.

Next, the folks making the contributions actually vote for the people leading the union. Last I checked, BIAW leadership is elected by the employers, even though the “insurance payments” are paid (in part, at least) by the workers.

You may argue that it is more difficult than it should be for a union member to insist that the union not use that member’s money for politics. If you do take that position, I’ll even find myself agreeing with you.

My own trade association has some of the attributes of a union, including a PAC. Because I’m offended at the endorsement of that PAC, I (and others) will be deleting the “voluntary RPAC donation” line on our annual dues. It’s something of a bother, and must be re-done every year but I can live with it.

(They tried a $100 manditory “contribution” once, and found that they lost a bunch of members that year.)

Some unions apparently do political contributions the way we do them. If you don’t want to contribute, you check the block, recompute the dues without the political contribution, and send in that amount.

You have a problem with that?

Others you may have a point about. Some unions apparently have more cumbersome ways of collecting political “contributions”.

How about a compromise? Both BIAW ensured workers and union members get a choice. Once a year, (at dues or election time for union members, at renewal time for BIAW ensured workers) everyone gets the option of declining to contribute. BIAW ensured workers get a rebate of the insurance premium, union members get the amount of their dues reduced.

Procedures to be no more complicated than checking a clearly marked box on a form that is distributed to all members/workers. If there is already a regularly distributed form, it can be added to that, just to reduce paperwork and costs.

Oh, and be a bit careful about the reverse argument, where doing nothing removes the contribution. In the case of BIAW, that method would pretty well shut them down. I think that the union could do a more effective job collecting contributions from members than BIAW could from workers.

While it is possible, unions make it almost impossible. I have cousins who are east coast teachers. Damn near impossible to stop the union political graft with their contributions. I gots a big famly cuz we like to do the bump and grind. I gots relatives in many industries.

Some unions are better about this than others. Certainly, I’ll agree that it should be simple, and that some unions make it difficult.

But remember, BIAW makes it impossible to decline. They administer a state program that takes mandatory deductions from workers’ paychecks, and then they use the money for political purposes.

Would the unions complain about a law that required a simple way of declining to contribute? Yes, they probably would, even though the tradeoff was to make it harder for outfits like BIAW to skim from workers.

Union leaders, like other elected officials, sometimes forget that they’re elected to represent their constituents, and will resist attempts to reduce their authority.

But… While the union leaders might complain, I think the idea could be sold to the voters, both liberal and conservative, as long as it was balanced.

A few years ago, something like this was floated as an initiative, but that one was aimed directly at unions, with no mention of outfits like BIAW, and written in such a way as to make it difficult to collect contributions at all.

It seems that whenever one of these initiatives is written, it is usually written in a way that attacks one side for the benefit of the other.

On a side note, I’d be willing to bet that any reasonably worded law about this would be vehemently opposed by both BIAW and at least some of the unions.

Well, to me the interesting thing is that the scumsuckers over at the BIAW have accepted that their name is a negative when associated with the attack ads they are funding. What other reason could there be to evade the PDC laws aimed at informing the listeners or watchers of campaign ads who has funded the ad? The PDC report of 5/30 shows the BIAW as giving a total of $249,250 to ChangePAC and the 5/28 report shows $245,000 being transferred from ChangePAC to It’s time for a change. If you hear the ad, it ends by disclosing that the largest contributor of “its time for a change” is ChangePAC thus hiding the fact that the ad was in fact funded by the BIAW.

Puddy and the rest of the lunatic fringe have no problem with that – no outrage at all – as the money goes to Puddy’s causes. His outrage with unions is situational – so typical of him and his ilk. Are individual rights any concern to Puddy? Only when it furthers his own communist-terrorist-fascist agenda. Otherwise, he’s an individual rights hater.

Unable to counter earlier posts by John Barelli, Puddy goes to the Republican-commie-fascist well and hauls out that old saw – union bashing. Perhaps he hopes no one will notice that he has no outrage whatsoever over his BIAW buddies skimming millions of dollars while administering a state program.

@9 Even if a developer were caught, even if it was BIAW’s Brad Spears himself holding the match, Puddy would show no outrage because those are his boys doing what he wants done.

“kill builder-hater bill” BIAW newsletter, March

“Weinstein’s builder-hater bill” BIAW newsletter, March

“The older folks in the mainstream enviro groups silently applaud this new and novel appraoch: If you build it, we will burn it. It’s the next natural step in the environmental movement.” BIAW newsletter, March

“What environmentals offer today,…is an international environmental socialism, an amalgam of Nazism and communism – an international environmental socialism with a centralized planning scheme.” BIAW newsletter, March

“Builders in Washington State are being squeezed by an environmental movement which extols ecofascism…” BIAW newsletter, March

“an ecological bureaucracy that would make any Soviet commissar green with envy.” BIAW newsletter, March

“So, much like Stalin and Hitler were divided on how to best go about their socialistic schemes, environmentalists are also divided over how to go about their socialistic scheme…” BIAW newsletter, March

I conclude that, much like BIAW, Puddy is a hater who can’t stop with the Psych 101 projection bullshit. It appears that Puddy is some sort of commie-fascist-corporatist who hates our constitution, our nation and our state.

Incorrectnottobright: Once a flight lands and is off the tarmac and taxiway the ground crew brings the flight into the parking space. Go to SeaTac sometime. If there is no ground crew the pilot cannot park the aircraft at the gate.

Re: flight arrival delays…presumably Puddy is making reference to the folks on the ground with the David Clarks and the flashlights. His incorrect assumption is that when he’s on an arriving flight and they can’t taxi to the gate it’s because those damnable lazy union jerk-offs simply can’t be bothered to come out right away and wave their above-mentioned flashlights.

NEWS FLASH….when that happens, it’s generally because either there’s a bunch of ground traffic blocking the way to the gate, or (most frequently) because the gate where the Puddmeister’s flight is supposed to “park” is still occupied by another plane. Betcha that situation happens pretty often on Alaska, most likely because the non-union knuckle-draggers provided by Alaska’s foreign-owned subcontractor are still busy stealing shit from passengers’ luggage and spraying graffitti all over the inside of the “pit”.

No it doesn’t mean that at all. The pilot on the latest airline I recently flew told us the gate was empty but there was no crew to accept the plane so he had to wait in the “bull-pen” until a ground crew arrived. At least you are smarter than your average nevercorrectstilldumnotbright!

Yanno, if you were in the market for a house, how would you feel about shelling out hundreds of thousands of your hard-earned (or hard-borrowed) money for one build by such a bunch of crooked scumbags as appear to belong to the BIAW?

Connor Homes, mentioned in Joel’s column, is certainly off my list. Does the BIAW have a public membership roster? Goldy, if there is one, how ’bout putting it up for all of us to see?

29 Hey, unless you were the last to get off the plane, I’ll bet the passengers behind you were just overjoyed to have you stop to chat with the crew on your way out. In fact, I’m surprised the crew wouldn’t have asked you to shut up and move along.

ArtFart @ 30 – I, too, would love to see that list…just an FYI, never buy an IntraCorp built property!!!! Not a single homeowner in my neighboorhood has been even slightly happy with the work and then we found out they gave themselves access THROUGH OUR PRIVATE property, to develop even more substandard homes.

@28 Your post is utter nonsense. Your ethics are situational at best, non-existant at the worse. You could give a flying monkey fuck that BIAW takes money from individuals, as long as they spend it on your favorite fascist cause – destroying America and ruining Mom’s apple pie. A typical hate-filled Republican, you’re a lying, made-in-China-flagpin-wearing, America-hating commie-fascist traitor. More than that, and most pathetic of all, you simply cannot stop projecting your treasonous commie-fascist bullshit onto the decent and morally superior people here at HA. Quit strutting around in your costume store-bought SS uniform, trade in those phony jack-boots, and start acting like a real fucking American!

Hmph…maybe I’m as dumb as Puddwacker says I am. Taking a look at the BIAW Web site, once one gets past the very lengthy front page excoriating the governor in particular and environmentalists, Democrats and non-‘wingers in general, they have page listing “member organizations”–which includes the “Master Builder” associations in King County and elsewhere. I always thought MBA’s were something different–they certainly present themselves to us ordinary folk as the the go-to group to find “quality” contractors.

35 It’s fascinating that over the past 30 years, the ultra-right-wing fanatacism that’s taken over the Republican Party has progressively turned off the “Archie Bunkers”–the northern-tier hard-hatted industrial workers whose conservative tendancies on “morality” issues, defense and international affairs helped put Eisenhower, Nixon and even Reagan in the White House. Now the neocons have written that faction off completely, choosing instead to curry the irrational favor of the “religious right” and the remaining pockets of racism in the deep South.

OFF TOPIC, but now is the time to invest in ISRG for a long term play 24-36 months. Their sales force is mopping up a wide open market in robotic surgery sales. Plus it’s a much better price at $245 than it was a month or two ago when you were touting it above $300.

Also, hope you played James River Coal Company JRCC or International Coal Group ICO like I told you.

Both stocks are on a tear. JRCC up 8.71% just TODAY. ICO up 3.55% today.

Poor Puddy – doesn’t even know that major flight delays are due to air control. I have flown more often than puddy has balls – and never had delays due to ground parking – everything has been take-off and landing delays.

Parking delays – just never had them and even then why would I blame a union? Puddy has no evidence as usual. Any statistics or actual data on unions being the cause of imaginary parking delays?

@43 Becoming unhinged, are you? Not that I feel any concern. I just hope to watch as you unravel.

Answer me this, why are you commie-fascists so ashamed to admit to what you are? Your close brethren, the American Nazis, seem to be quite proud of what they are, no matter how disgusting it might be to the rest of us.

Puddy @ 8: I’ve never had to wait for a “ground handler” while I’ve been on an airplane. But I’m glad they are there. And I know they use them in Japan, I can’t say I’ve noticed with respect to other countries. And as far as whether it is a “union rule” or not, I suspect any requirements are due to FAA regulation, not a union rules.

It’s not that easy to maneuver a large airplane on the tarmac. From the cockpit, you have REALLY lousy visability of the wingtips and tail. There are lots of instances where airplanes have caused substantial damage to one another, with the wing or horizontal stabilizer slicing into part of another airplane. If a wing tank gets burst, suddenly you have a very big risk of fire, with perhaps two airplanes loaded with people.

Using a ground handler (flagger) helps the pilot quite a bit, by seeing what the pilot isn’t able to see.

At Boeing, they don’t move any aircraft without four people walking along with the plane – one guy on point, two “wing walkers” with radios on the tip of each wing, and one following along behind. Each has a radio and can yell “stop!” at any time. This isn’t a union rule – it’s a Boeing rule. They don’t want to see a customer’s airplane broken before it flys away.

Like usual, liberals talking out of their asses. BIAW membership is completely voluntary and as a member no money is paid by the employee but as a 1.5% of the member company annual L&I premiums. Example company pays $20,000.00 a year in premiums it would cost that company $300.00 to be a member. Also to be a member you must be a member of the Master Builders Association which costs a minimum of $600.00. In return in helping manage claims they “report as a group in the industry” and if those members that work hard at providing a safe work environment the member can get refunds of maybe 20 or 30% of the yearly premium amount of that 20 grand. Quite an incentive to provide a safe work environment. So as to you uninformed HA experts, BIAW is far from what is written here. L&I has amassed over 11 BILLION dollars in excess funds which is 10 times their annual need. I believe those officials at L&I will be shaking in their boots when Rossi takes over.

Mark @ 48: You are missing the point again. It’s not the BIAW membership dues which are at issue, it is the L&I premiums which are paid not to the Dept. of L & I, but to the “self-manged fund” of which the BIAW takes a management fee. This is allowed under provisions of the Washington state Employment Security Act which allow an employer to be “self-insured”, if they are large enough to provide fianancial accountability or bonding, or through a trade association, such as the BIAW.

As you mentioned, the BIAW takes a cut of those premiums as “management fees”. The less they pay out in claims, the more is available as a management fee, although I guess if they got too greedy their members would want a rebate. The “experience” rate reductions is similar to the preceedure followed by the State L & I for claims it manages.

Anyway, ask the BIAW if they deduct L & I premiums from their worker’s paychecks. I would be absolutely astounded if any replied that they did not. Personally, I thnik it should be an entirely employer-borne expense, but it is legal for them to make the deduction, so most employees of hourly workers do so.

Do the workers have the right to refuse to pay those premiums, on the principle that a portion of it is going to fund the BIAW political activities, after being funnelled through the fund as a “management fee”? No. Their employer can deduct the premiums anyway. If they don’t like it, their only recourse is to quit.

By the way, getting back to ground-handling of aircraft. I explained earlier why it is not union feather-bedding, but reasonable safety proceedures, for a flag crew to supervise an airplane in and out of the gate.

I had lost the picture, but I found it again online – along with an article explaining how the accident happened (in anchorage). There are more examples, but the picture and accompanying description by an Aussie pilot who arrived in time to hear the full story (“More Power!!!!) is very entertaining. Fortunately, no one was hurt, but not for lack of trying by the Asiana pilot.

Please Donate

I appreciate feeling appreciated. Also, money.

Currency:

Amount:

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Search HA

Follow Goldy

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.